URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Renewable Revolution
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 6912--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Science
       By: AGelbert Date: April 20, 2017, 12:51 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://www.scienceabc.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/fish-meme5.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]Do sea fish and sea mammals drink sea water and if they
       do how do they eliminate Sodium? ???[/center]
       
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/34y5mvr.gif
       Fresh water fish do
       not drink water, they absorbed it through their skin, like
       osmosis. Sea water fish do drink water, and excrete the salt
       through their gills.
       The salmon, which lives in both environments, gets its water
       like a fresh water fish when in fresh water and like a sea water
       fish when in the sea.
  HTML http://www.answers.com/Q/Do_sea_fish_and_sea_mammals_drink_sea_water_and_if_they_do_how_do_they_eliminate_Sodium
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://www.todayifoundout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/fish.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]How Fish Gills Work[/center]
       These fantastic little organs allow the fish to absorb oxygen
       from the water and use it for energy. Functionally, gills are
       not that dissimilar to the lungs in humans and other mammals.
       The main difference is how they are able to absorb much smaller
       concentrations of available oxygen, while allowing the fish to
       maintain an appropriate level of Sodium Chloride (salt) in their
       bloodstream.
       Gills work on the same principle as lungs. In the lungs, there
       are small sacs called alveoli that are approximately 70%
       capillaries. These capillaries carry deoxygenated blood from the
       body. As oxygen and carbon dioxide pass across the alveoli’s
       membrane, the capillaries take the newly oxygenated blood back
       to the body. Similarly, gills have small rows and columns of
       specialized cells grouped together called the epithelium.
       Deoxygenated blood in the fish is supplied directly from the
       heart to the epithelium via arteries, and even yet smaller
       arterioles. As seawater is forced across the epithelium
       membranes, dissolved oxygen in the seawater is taken up by tiny
       blood vessels and veins, while the carbon dioxide is exchanged.
       Gills themselves have a car radiator-like appearance. Most fish
       have 4 gills on each side, consisting of a main bar-like
       structure that has numerous branches as that of a tree, and
       those branches consisting of even smaller branch-like
       structures. This arrangement of cells allows for a very large
       surface area when the gills are immersed in water.
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://www.todayifoundout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/fish-gill.jpg[/img][/center]
       Functionally, the mechanism for pumping water over the
       radiator-like gills seems to vary depending on the species of
       fish. In general, this is achieved by the fish lowering the
       floor of the mouth and widening the outer skin flap that
       protects the gills, called the operculum. This increase in
       volume lowers the pressure within the mouth causing the water to
       rush in. As the fish raises the floor of their mouth, an inward
       fold of skin forms a valve of sorts which doesn’t allow water to
       rush out. The pressure is then increased compared to the outside
       of the mouth and the water is forced through the operculum
       opening and across the gills.
       Gills themselves need a very large surface area to provide the
       fish with the necessary oxygen demands. Air is approximately 21%
       oxygen or about 210,000 parts per million. Water, on the other
       hand, only has about 4-8 parts per million of dissolved oxygen
       that the gills can extract. Because of this, if the fish did not
       have a large gill surface area to absorb as much oxygen as it
       can for it’s size, it would quickly suffocate. Cold blooded
       animals also tend to have a lower metabolism than their warm
       blooded counterparts. This aids them in their ability to handle
       environments of low available oxygen. Should the same size fish
       be warm blooded, the metabolism of the little swimmer would be
       increased to the point that the available oxygen would not be
       sufficient and little Nemo would perish.
       While the large gill surface area allows for sufficient exchange
       of carbon dioxide and oxygen, it at the same time exposes the
       same large blood volume to the hypertonic (that is, saltier than
       thou) sea water, creating a situation in which fish must have a
       backup mechanism for expelling excess sodium that has been
       incidentally absorbed. Conversely, freshwater fish need to have
       an opposite mechanism allowing them to excrete excess water to
       keep their sodium levels appropriately high. Never mind about
       those anadromous gypsies who trounce back and forth, able to
       thrive in both fresh and salt water environments. We will just
       call them show offs and leave it at that.
       To deal with this sodium problem, inside the gill resides nifty
       little cells called chloride cells. These cells allow for the
       extrusion of any unwanted sodium. Freshwater fish tend to have
       less of these cells than do their seafaring counterparts. This,
       combined with the ability to have extremely diluted urine,
       allows fresh water fish to keep their sodium level appropriately
       high.
       [center]Chloride Cells (cc) of Nile tilapia seen as dark dots
       with examples encircled.[/center]
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jonathan_Roques/publication/45639555/figure/fig4/AS:306083668217858@1449987441075/Fig-4-Chloride-cells-cc-of-Nile-tilapia-seen-as-dark-dots-with-examples-encircled.png[/img][/center]
       [center]Fig. 4. Chloride cells (cc) of Nile tilapia, seen as
       dark dots with examples encircled, are situated in the
       filamental epithelium at the base of the lamellae (gl). Control
       fish A. In the 6 h and 24 h post treatment groups, chloride
       cells had migrated towards the apices of the lamella (arrow) B.
       This phenomenon was observed in both the clipped and handled
       fish. cc: chloride cell, gf: gill filament, gl: gill lamellae.
       [/center]
       If you liked this article, you might also enjoy subscribing to
       our new Daily Knowledge YouTube channel, as well as:
       ◾Whales Don’t Spray Water Out of Their Blowholes Nor are
       Their Throats and Blowhole Connected
       ◾Clownfish are All Born Male, a Dominant Male Will Turn
       Female When the Current Female of the Group Dies
       ◾The Candirú Fish Can’t Swim Up a Stream of Your Urine  ;D
       ◾Sushi is Not Raw Fish
       ◾Goldfish Do Not Have a Three Second Memory
       Bonus Facts:  ;D
       ◾Given that the size of the gills helps with the uptake of
       oxygen, as you might expect, the more active a fish is, the
       bigger the gills compared to their body size.
       ◾Because the marine environment is hyperosmotic, boney
       fish tend to lose water through osmosis. Because of this. they
       tend to compensate by taking in water through the gut, thereby
       exacerbating the problem of sodium uptake.
       ◾The distance between the blood and water in the
       epithelial cells of fish is approximately 1 micro meter, or
       about 1 millionth of a meter.
       ◾At approximately 32,000 species, fish exhibit greater
       species diversity then any other class of vertebrates.
       ◾It is estimated that there are approximately 15,000
       unidentified fish species.  :o
       ◾Fossil evidence has suggested that fish have been on the
       earth for approximately 400 million years.
       ◾Fish that have the ability to live in both salt water and
       fresh water are called Anadromous fish.
       ◾Most boney fish maintain the sodium content of their body
       fluids at approximately 40% that of sea water.
       ◾Anadromous fish must have physiological processes to deal
       with the changing salt content in their environment. One
       mechanism used is that, while in fresh water, they tend to have
       the ability to excrete very dilute urine, thus removing more
       fresh water and keeping their sodium levels normal. While in
       salt water, they use a specialized group of salt excreting cells
       in the gills and mouth lining. They also have kidneys that can
       excrete very concentrated urine.
       ◾Sharks
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/shrk.gif
       and
       Hagfish have a much greater salt content than bony fish and it
       is naturally in balance with ocean water, thus not having the
       bony fishes problem of salt regulation.
  HTML http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/09/how-fish-gills-work/
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/hagfish-getty-01a.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]Now you know why they call the above a hagfish.
       :D[/center]
       Test on Monday.  ;D
       #Post#: 7046--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Science
       By: AGelbert Date: May 4, 2017, 8:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]The Landing on Titan  :o[/center]
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/9L471ct7YDo[/center]
       #Post#: 7134--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Science
       By: AGelbert Date: May 14, 2017, 1:03 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [img
       width=140]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200317134631.png[/img]
       [center]Watch amazing footage of Cassini diving towards Saturn
       [/center]
       Last updated on May 4th, 2017  at 5:25 pm by Tibi Puiu
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/9LBLCgCYy0I[/center]
       Last week, NASA’s Cassini probe performed the first dive around
       Saturn’s rings as part of its Grand Finale — a series of hula
       hoop jumps through the gaps of Saturn’s rings before the
       spacecraft is scheduled to crash in the planet’s atmosphere. We
       learned quite a lot from this episode, such as that the gap
       between the gas giant’s rings is more or less empty. Apparently,
       not only did Cassini acoustically record what happened as
       charged particles whizzed past the spacecraft, it also filmed
       Saturn’s atmosphere as it traveled above it. Hit play for a
       glimpse of this one-of-a-kind spectacle.
       What you’re seeing here compressed in less than a minute was
       actually filmed over an hour and then sped up. Cassini captured
       shots of the planet’s whirling atmosphere as it traveled
       southward from 45,000 miles above the surface at the start of
       the video to 4,200 miles by the end of the show. This is why the
       quality of the video seems to abruptly change since “the
       smallest resolvable features in the atmosphere changed from 5.4
       miles (8.7 kilometers) per pixel to 0.5 miles (810 meters) per
       pixel,” NASA explained in the press release.
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Cassini-7.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]This amazing photo was shot by Cassini on April 12 at a
       distance of 1,400 million km from Earth. Image Credit:
       NASA/JPL[/center]
       One of the highlights is the flyby above Saturn’s famous
       hexagon-shaped cloud patterns. These can be twice as wide as
       Earth’s diameter and are formed by jet streams.
       [center]“I was surprised to see so many sharp edges along the
       hexagon’s outer boundary and the eye-wall of the polar vortex,”
       said Kunio Sayanagi, an associate of the Cassini imaging team
       based at Hampton University in Virginia, in a statement.
       “Something must be keeping different latitudes from mixing to
       maintain those edges,” he added.[/center]
       If you thought this video was impressive, the next passes should
       render even sharper and captivating interesting images after the
       Cassini team change the spacecraft’s “conservative” camera
       settings.
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Cassini-6.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]Credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Space Science
       Institute[/center]
       Cassini will make about 20 more passes around Saturn and its
       rings before finally making its final jump into the planet’s
       atmosphere sometime in September 2017.
       “The spacecraft is now on a ballistic path, so that even if we
       were to forgo future small course adjustments using thrusters,
       we would still enter Saturn’s atmosphere on Sept. 15 no matter
       what,” said Earl Maize, Cassini project manager at JPL.
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Cassini-4.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]Credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech[/center]
  HTML http://www.zmescience.com/space/cassini-dive-dive-saturn-432/
       #Post#: 7159--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Science
       By: AGelbert Date: May 18, 2017, 3:00 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [img
       width=140]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200317134631.png[/img]
       [center]The main types of mountains — Earth’s ups and
       downs[/center]
       Last updated on May 15th, 2017 at 5:19 pm by Mihai Andrei
       Mountains have played a central role in human culture since
       times immemorial. Yet it’s only recently that we’ve started to
       understand how mountains form and develop; to this day, these
       magnificent landforms still hold many secrets. There are several
       ways to analyze and classify mountains depending on what field
       of science you come from, but here, we’ll have a look at the
       most common classification and then go into a bit more detail.
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Mount_Everest_as_seen_from_Drukair2_PLW_edit.jpg[/img][/center][center]Aerial<br
       />view of Mount Everest from the south. The Himalayas are fold
       mountains. Image credits: airline company Drukair in Bhutan.
       [/center]
       The types of mountains
       Generally, mountains are split into: fold mountains, block
       mountains, dome mountains, and volcanic mountains. Plateau
       mountains, uplifted passive margins, and hotspot mountains are
       also sometimes considered.
       &#10625;
       or more tectonic plates collide.
       &#10625;
       geological processes which push some rocks up and others down.
       &#10625;  Dome mountains — formed as a result of hot magma
       pushing beneath the crust.
       &#10625;  Volcanic mountains — also known by a simpler name:
       volcanoes.
       &#10625;  Other types of mountains sometimes brought into
       classifications are plateau mountains, uplifted passive margins,
       and hotspot mountains.
       Fold mountains
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Rocky_Mountain_National_Park_PA162784.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center][I]The Rocky Mountains are a great example of fold
       mountains. Image credits: National Park Service Digital Image
       Archives.[/i][/center]
       These are the not only the most common, but also the biggest
       types of mountains (on Earth, at least). Fold mountain chains
       can spread over thousands of kilometers — we’re talking about
       the Himalayas, the Alps, the Rockies, the Andes, all the big
       boys. They’re also relatively young mountains (which is another
       reason they’re so tall, as they haven’t been thoroughly eroded),
       but that’s “young” in geological terms — still a few good tens
       of millions of years.
       In order to understand how fold mountains form and develop, we
       have to dip our fingers into some tectonics. The Earth’s
       litosphere is split into rigid plates which move independently
       to each other. There are seven major plates, and several smaller
       ones across the world. When two plates collide, all sorts of
       things can start happening. For instance, if one is denser than
       the other (oceanic plates are typically denser due to the rocks
       they are made of), a process a subduction will start — the
       heavier one will slowly glide beneath the other one. But if they
       have relatively similar densities, then they will start to
       crumple up and drive movement upwards. Basically, the tectonic
       plates are pushed, but since neither can slide beneath each
       other, they just build up geological folds. To get a better idea
       of how this looks like, try to push two pieces of papers towards
       each other. Some parts will go up, and those are the mountains.
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Lewis_overthrust_fault_nh10f.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]Sometimes, the folding happens inside the continent and
       is associated with faulting. This is a representation of that
       process, in northern Montana, USA and Southern Alberta, Canada.
       Image credits: Greg Beaumont, National Park Service.[/center]
       This process is called orogeny (giving birth to mountains) and
       it generally takes millions of years for it to complete. Many of
       today’s fold mountains are still developing as the tectonic
       process unfolds. The process doesn’t only happen on tectonic
       edges, sometimes the mountain-generating fold process can take
       place well inside a tectonic plate.
       Block mountains (or fault-block)
       Whereas the previous category was all about folds, this one is
       all about faults; geological faults, that is.
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/1280px-Fault-Horst-Graben.svg.png[/img][/center]
       [center]Depiction of the block-faulting process. Image credits:
       U.S. Geological Survey.[/center]
       Let’s go back to the previous idea for a moment. Let’s say that
       under pressure, some parts of a tectonic plate is starting to
       fold. As the pressure grows and grows, at one point the rock can
       simply break. Faults are those breaks, they’re the planar
       fractures or discontinuities in volumes of rock. They can vary
       tremendously in size from a few centimeters to mountain-sized.
       Basically, when big blocks of rock are broken through faulting,
       some of them can be pushed up or down, and thus block mountains
       can result. Higher blocks are called horsts and troughs are
       called grabens. Their size can also be impressive, though
       they’re generally not as big as the fold mountains because the
       process which generates them takes place on a smaller scale and
       involves less pressure. Still, the Sierra Nevada mountains,
       which are a good example of block mountains, feature a block 650
       km long and 80 km wide. Another good example is the Rhine Valley
       and the Vosges mountain in Europe. Rift valleys can also
       generate block mountains, as is the case in the Eastern African
       Rift, for example.
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Mount_Alice_and_Temple_Crag_in_the_Sierra_Nevada_28U.S.29.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]Mount Alice and Temple Crag in the Sierra Nevada. Image
       credits: Miguel.v[/center]
       It can be quite difficult to identify a block mountain without
       knowing its underlying geology but generally, they tend to have
       a steep side and a slowly sloping side.
       Volcanic mountains
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/ISS-38_Kliuchevskoi_Volcano_on_Kamchatka.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]Annotated view includes Ushkovsky, Tolbachik,
       Bezymianny, Zimina, and Udina stratovolcanoes of Kamchatka,
       Russia. Image taken aboard the ISS in 2013.[/center]
       Everyone knows something about volcanoes, though we rarely think
       about them as mountains (and truth be told, they aren’t always
       mountains).
       Volcanic mountains are created when magma from deep under the
       surface starts to rise up. At one point, it erupts in the form
       of lava, and then cools down, solidifies, and starts to pile on,
       building a mountain. Mount Fuji in Japan and Mount Rainier are
       typical examples of volcanic mountains — with Mount Rainier
       being one of the most dangerous volcanoes in the world. However,
       it’s not necessary for the volcano to be active.
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/mountain-2262264_960_720.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]The summit of Mauna Kea. Image credits:
       Pixabay.[/center]
       Several types of volcanoes can generate mountains, with
       Stratovolcanoes typically being the biggest ones. Despite Mount
       Everest being the tallest mountain above sea level, Mauna Kea is
       actually much taller than Everest — at over 10,000 meters.
       However, much of it is submerged, with only 4205 meters rising
       above sea level.
       Dome mountains
       Dome mountains are also the result of magmatic activity, though
       they are not volcanic in nature.
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Fairview_Dome.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]Southeast face of Fairview Dome in Yosemite National
       Park. Image credits: Jennie.[/center]
       Sometimes, lots of magma can accumulate beneath the ground and
       start to swell the surface up. Sometimes, it never reaches the
       surface but still forms a dome. As that magma cools down and
       solidifies, it is often tougher than other surrounding rocks can
       be exposed after millions of years of erosion. The mountain is
       this dome — a former accumulation of magma which cooled down and
       was exposed by erosion.
       Round Mountain is a relatively recent dome mountain. It
       represents a volcanic feature of the Canadian Northern
       Cordilleran Volcanic Province that formed in the past 1.6
       million. Black Dome Mountain is another popular example, also in
       Canada.
       Other types of mountains
       As we mentioned above, there’s no strict classification of all
       mountains, so other types are sometimes mentioned.
       Plateau mountains
       Basically, plateau mountains aren’t formed by something going up
       — they’re formed by something going down. Imagine a plateau, for
       instance. Let’s say it has a river on it. Year after year, that
       river carves a part of the plateau, bit by bit. After some time,
       there might only be a bit of the original plateau left
       un-eroded, and that part basically becomes a mountain. This
       generally takes a very long time even by geological standards
       and can go up to billions of years. Some geologists group all
       these mountains along with dome mountains into a broader
       category called erosional mountains.
       [b]Uplifted passive margins[/b]
       There’s no geological model to fully explain how uplifted
       passive margins formed, but we do see them in the world. The
       Scandinavian Mountains, Eastern Greenland, the Brazilian
       Highlands or Australia’s Great Dividing Range are such examples,
       owing their existence to some uplifting mechanism.
       [b]Hotspot mountains[/b]
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Hawaii_hotspot.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center][I]The trail of underwater mountains created as the
       tectonic plate moved across the Hawaii hotspot over millions of
       years. Image credits: USGS.[/i][/center]
       Although once thought to be identical to volcanic mountains, new
       research has shed some light on this belief. Hotspots are
       volcanic regions thought to be fed by a part of the underlying
       mantle which is significantly hotter than its surroundings.
       However, even though that hot area is fixed, the plates move
       around it — causing it to leave a hotspot trail of mountains.
  HTML http://www.zmescience.com/other/feature-post/main-types-mountains-earths-ups-downs/
       Discussion with article Author:  ;D
       agelbert • 2 days ago
       Great article! I know that it is very controversial in main
       stream academic geology circles, but what do you think of the
       theory of global expansion causing mountain formation as the
       surface of the sphere becomes less curved? There is indisputable
       geologic evidence that all the ocean basins are much younger
       than the earth's crust on continents. Tectonic plate theory does
       not have an answer to that but the expanding earth theory fits
       the planetary geology much better. I am not saying that plate
       tectonics are not involved in mountain formation; I am saying
       that an expanding globe combined with plate tectonics is a more
       comprehensive theory of our geology.
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/tiCMFzpMnZM[/center]
       Mihai > &#10625;
       I'm not particularly familiar with this theory, but the tectonic
       mechanism of orogeny is pretty well established.
       agelbert > Andrei Mihai • 17 hours ago
       Well, the maximum age of the ocean basins is about 190 million
       years. But the thing that is most convincing to me that
       something besides plate tectonics is at work is the distance of
       the oceanic rifts from the land masses of Australia and
       Antarctica. It makes no sense UNLESS they stretched apart
       without any subduction whatsoever.
       Also, the closer you get to the oceanic volcanic ridges, the
       younger the crust is. Finally the crust of the earth is thinner
       in the ocean basins than on continents. All of that argues for
       global expansion.
       I know you will think this unscientific, but I am familiar with
       stretch marks on human female breasts when they grow too quickly
       for the skin to adjust normally. The ocean basin topography
       looks uncannily like these types of stretch marks. But the
       stretching of landscape on land is a known geologic feature that
       also appears to be identical, though in much smaller scale to
       the oceanic "stretch mark" like topography.
       Please watch the video and tell me what you think is inaccurate
       about global expansion theory.
       Two intriguing screen shots from the Expanding Earth video:
       [center][font=georgia]Expanding Earth versus Plate
       Tectonics[/font][/center]
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-180517142826.png[/img][/center]
       [center][font=georgia]
       Continental fit only on a smaller earth globe[/font][/center]
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-180517143649.png[/img][/center]
       #Post#: 7168--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Science
       By: AGelbert Date: May 20, 2017, 2:33 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=AGelbert link=topic=145.msg7159#msg7159
       date=1495137653]
       [img
       width=140]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200317134631.png[/img]
       [center]The main types of mountains — Earth’s ups and
       downs[/center]
       Last updated on May 15th, 2017 at 5:19 pm by Mihai Andrei
       There’s no geological model to fully explain how uplifted
       passive margins formed, but we do see them in the world. The
       Scandinavian Mountains, Eastern Greenland, the Brazilian
       Highlands or Australia’s Great Dividing Range are such examples,
       owing their existence to some uplifting mechanism.
       [b]Hotspot mountains[/b]
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Hawaii_hotspot.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center][I]The trail of underwater mountains created as the
       tectonic plate moved across the Hawaii hotspot over millions of
       years. Image credits: USGS.[/i][/center]
       Although once thought to be identical to volcanic mountains, new
       research has shed some light on this belief. Hotspots are
       volcanic regions thought to be fed by a part of the underlying
       mantle which is significantly hotter than its surroundings.
       However, even though that hot area is fixed, the plates move
       around it — causing it to leave a hotspot trail of mountains.
  HTML http://www.zmescience.com/other/feature-post/main-types-mountains-earths-ups-downs/
       [/quote]
       Discussion with article Author:  ;D
       agelbert •
       Great article! I know that it is very controversial in main
       stream academic geology circles, but what do you think of the
       theory of global expansion causing mountain formation as the
       surface of the sphere becomes less curved? There is indisputable
       geologic evidence that all the ocean basins are much younger
       than the earth's crust on continents. Tectonic plate theory does
       not have an answer to that but the expanding earth theory fits
       the planetary geology much better. I am not saying that plate
       tectonics are not involved in mountain formation; I am saying
       that an expanding globe combined with plate tectonics is a more
       comprehensive theory of our geology.
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/tiCMFzpMnZM[/center]
       Mihai > &#10625;
       I'm not particularly familiar with this theory, but the tectonic
       mechanism of orogeny is pretty well established.
       agelbert > Andrei Mihai •
       Well, the maximum age of the ocean basins is about 190 million
       years. But the thing that is most convincing to me that
       something besides plate tectonics is at work is the distance of
       the oceanic rifts from the land masses of Australia and
       Antarctica. It makes no sense UNLESS they stretched apart
       without any subduction whatsoever.
       Also, the closer you get to the oceanic volcanic ridges, the
       younger the crust is. Finally the crust of the earth is thinner
       in the ocean basins than on continents. All of that argues for
       global expansion.
       I know you will think this unscientific, but I am familiar with
       stretch marks on human female breasts when they grow too quickly
       for the skin to adjust normally. The ocean basin topography
       looks uncannily like these types of stretch marks. But the
       stretching of landscape on land is a known geologic feature that
       also appears to be identical, though in much smaller scale to
       the oceanic "stretch mark" like topography.
       Please watch the video and tell me what you think is inaccurate
       about global expansion theory.
       Two intriguing screen shots from the Expanding Earth video:
       [center][font=georgia]Expanding Earth versus Plate
       Tectonics[/font][/center]
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-180517142826.png[/img][/center]
       [center][font=georgia]
       Continental fit only on a smaller earth globe[/font][/center]
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-180517143649.png[/img][/center]
       Andrei Mihai > agelbert  • a day ago
       I do think this is pretty unscientific, yes. I'll agree that
       plate tectonics is not a perfect, all-encompassing theory. It's
       an area of active research, and the sheer complexity of the
       subject will have us learning new things years and years from
       now... but.
       The video starts from some truthful, and some false premises.
       For instance, the oldest oceanic crust isn't 140 million years
       old. In the west Pacific and north-west Atlantic, oceanic crust
       is 180-200 million years old. These are pretty big areas, not
       isolated patches, but it gets even better. In the Eastern parts
       of the Mediterranean, there are remnants of the former Tethys
       Ocean, which are 270 million years old (some studies put bits of
       it at 340 million years old). This is the most commonly
       referenced map, which I recommend having a look at.
       
       [center] [img
       width=640]
  HTML https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/55f6cf7b90a51d2bc077678770a9b7066161178d05e1a71b3ae59c66ac20c153.jpg[/img][/center]
       There's a mountain of evidence supporting plate tectonics, so we
       know it's happening, it's very much real, though we're not
       exactly sure what's the exact mechanism of movement, and how all
       of it happens. This is always the case when you're studying
       phenomena on this scale, and working only with indirect
       evidence. As for the disappearance of plates, look up
       subduction. Oceanic plates are denser and "heavier" than
       continental plates, which is why they tend to subduce and get
       consumed in the lithosphere.
       Cheers!
       agelbert > Andrei Mihai •
       Thank you for your polite and respectful response. It is rare to
       see an erudite person like yourself treat a person who is not
       credentialed this way. So, I am grateful for this conversation
       with you.
       I respect your opinion, and that of the geologic mainstream
       scientific community. I agree with you that more research and
       experimentation is required to fully understand plate tectonics.
       The only question I have, judging from your comment about the
       ocean basin age mentioned in the video, is why didn't you watch
       the full video? The different ocean basin age crusts issue was
       explained in detail, along with a discussion of the
       Mediterranean Sea basin.
       I have studied subduction theory. I remain unconvinced that such
       a crustal "conveyer belt" actually exists simply because of the
       nearly equidistant volcanic rifts from the continental plates on
       either side in the Atlantic Ocean and between Australia and
       Antarctica.
       Furthermore, subduction is a rather convenient excuse to claim
       that ocean basin crust is "reformed" with such high temperatures
       that its age simply "appears" to be much younger than the 4.5
       billion year, much older dated continental land areas. The 4.5
       billon year dating versus the much younger age for ocean basins
       as you stated, citing a maximum of 340 million years for one
       basin age versus 190 million years for others (with various
       documented ages in between), is not explained by subduction
       theory.
       I am of the belief that the dating methods used by geologists
       are accurate, at least within an error margin of 100 million
       years.
       So, the gigantic age gap problem between continents and ocean
       basins remains to be answered.
       agelbert > Andrei Mihai •
       If the Mckenzie model works for continental crust, why isn't it
       also clear that the same mechanism is at work in oceanic basin
       crust (i.e. stretching from expansion, not contraction)?  ???
       [center][center]
       [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://www.le.ac.uk/gl/art/gl209/lecture4/image60.gif[/img]
       [/center][/center]
       Well, it is clear to the geologists. But that's where the
       controversy begins as to the CAUSE of that indisputable evidence
       of stretching.
       In the graphic below, accepted by mainstream geologists, the
       stretching of the ocean basins is not in question. They admit
       that the basins are stretching; they simply require the
       subduction theory to explain that crustal stretching in order to
       avoid dealing with the ocean basin stretching based evidence of
       global expansion.
       [center]
       [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8481451/slides/slide_15.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]
  HTML http://slideplayer.com/slide/8481451/[/center]
       And as to crustal compression, as alleged to be the cause of
       continents moving towards one another, thereby causing mountain
       ranges to be formed, a less curved sphere of the earths surface,
       the result of an expanding globe, is a better explanation of how
       absolutely every mountain range on earth was formed. Just look,
       with unbiased eyes, at the location of mountain ranges and you
       will see what I mean.
       Mountain range creation can be modeled on a tiny scale by arcing
       a 4' by 8' piece of plywood, fixing it in position, and applying
       plaster of Paris at varying thicknesses over it. After the
       plaster is hard in a day or so, gradually reduce the curvature
       and observe the "crustal compression", NOT from "continental
       plate collisions", but from a less curved surface.
       This effect can also be observed in an inflated balloon covered
       with mud that is allowed to dry. When the balloon is further
       inflated the compression of the mud to form miniature "mountain
       ranges" and "ocean basins, where the added balloon area appears,
       is obvious to anyone but a mainstream geologist. I think they
       are just stubborn and set in their ways. But someday the obvious
       reality of an expanding globe will be accepted over the
       convenient theory of subduction invented to avoid accepting the
       reality of an expanding globe.
       Cheers!
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/East_Pacific_Rise_Oceanic-Crust.jpg[/img][/center]
       [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://ksuweb.kennesaw.edu/~jdirnber/oceanography/LecuturesOceanogr/LecGeology/0318E.jpg[/img]
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://www.earthbyte.org/Resources/Agegrid/age_of_ocean_floor_1024_lowres.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]
       [img
       width=640]
  HTML https://manoa.hawaii.edu/exploringourfluidearth/sites/default/files/M1U7-Fig7.58-LithosphereAge.jpg[/img][/center]
       #Post#: 7177--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Science
       By: AGelbert Date: May 22, 2017, 5:47 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]The ORDER that emerges from CHAOS
  HTML http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif
       
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif[/center]
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/eJAs9Qr359o[/center]
       Published on Oct 31, 2016
       One of the best educational videos on Chaos Theory and Dynamic
       Systems that I have ever seen.
       Chaos is order out of disorder, and [I]order out of
       non-linearity.[/I]
       When there is agreement within a system, the more complex a
       system, the better a bottom up/emergent organizational structure
       handles the diversity.
       [center]
       [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-031014195733.jpeg[/img][/center]
       #Post#: 7181--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Science
       By: AGelbert Date: May 22, 2017, 7:37 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [move][font=verdana]The Secret Life of Waves[/font][/move]
       [center][img
       width=280]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-040215213035.gif[/img][img<br
       />width=263]
  HTML https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/60/52/bb/6052bbe5fcb88daddf1f55d7c42a39f2.jpg[/img]<br
       />[/center]
       [center][center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/Kmllm1dAug4[/center][/center]
       Published on May 3, 2014
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://media.giphy.com/media/NzyYhZAOjVgxq/giphy.gif[/img]<br
       />[/center]
       #Post#: 7500--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Science
       By: AGelbert Date: July 16, 2017, 12:41 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301014182447.gif[/center]
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/UStaaluvahc[/center]
       [center][img
       width=50]
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_6656.gif[/img]<br
       />
       [img
       width=50]
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1730.gif[/img]<br
       />                     ???                         [img
       width=50]
  HTML http://www.desismileys.com/smileys/desismileys_1402.gif[/img]<br
       /> [/center]
       
       Agelbert NOTE: You know, I can reason out an expanding earth
       from the gravity problems that large dinosaurs present. The
       physical size, as well as the nerve sensation transmission and
       circulatory system physiology  of a land animal is size limited
       by gravity. But the claim that fossil fuels are a "renewable
       resource"
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/ugly004.gif
       is absolute
       balderdash!
       Whenever someone wants to lie to you effectively, they will
       start with a lot of truth that challenges modern scientific
       assumptions AND THEN CAREFULLY mix the mendacious propaganda
       along the way. I suspect a some fossil fuel industry
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif
       money funded
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp<br
       />that bold faced LIE in the above video about fossil fuels bein
       g
       "Renewable".
       The following well researched and illustrated video  [img
       width=25
       height=30]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png[/img]<br
       />gets into the irrefutably impossible to solve physiological
       problems with the size of the large dinosaurs in our present
       gravity:
       [center][font=times new roman]Large Dinosaurs and their Gravity
       Problems[/font][/center]
       [font=times new roman]The Ganymede Hypothesis [/font]
       [quote][font=times new roman]Streamed live on Jun 25, 2016
       Problems involving torque, square/cube phenomena, blood pressure
       and other conundrums which would make life in our present world
       impossible for a large dinosaur.[/font][/quote]
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/sMQT-y6oK2s[/center]
       Agelbert NOTE: If you think the dinosaurs existed in our present
       gravity, you believe an impossibility. Yes, mainstream paleo
       poobas want you to believe that
       lie.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp<br
       /> What you need to ask yourself is, WHY do they insist on that
       easily deconstructed unscientific baloney?
       BECAUSE they would then have to doubt the assumption that earth
       never expanded. They do not want to do that. That would make
       them look like a pack of fools. They are proud of their pet
       theories and will stick to them, no matter how irrational.  :P
       Science has done a lot of good. But making scientific theories
       equivalent to God's laws is irrational and foolish. There is
       only one God, and He is 100% TRUTH, unlike the Scientific
       Community, which barely passes the 51% mark on any given day.
       #Post#: 7649--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Science
       By: AGelbert Date: August 6, 2017, 10:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [move]Unbelievably Strange Planets in Space[/move]
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/18rARy8g4Hc[/center]
       Published on Jul 28, 2017
       #Post#: 7928--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Science
       By: AGelbert Date: September 15, 2017, 6:15 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]NASA versus SPACEX[/center]
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/fQEBu3rZmcw[/center]
       Joe Scott
       Published on Sep 11, 2017
       NASA vs SpaceX: Who Will Get To Mars First? | Answers With Joe
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page